Case Note & Summary
The case involved an appeal by an individual against the retention of his passport by the Central Bureau of Investigation (C.B.I.). The appellant, a non-resident Indian, had his passport seized during a search conducted by the C.B.I. based on an FIR related to a sting operation. The Special Judge initially ordered the release of the passport, but this was reversed by the High Court, prompting the appellant to appeal to the Supreme Court. The appellant's counsel argued that the impounding of passports must comply with the Passports Act, 1967, specifically citing Section 10(3)(e) which allows impounding only if criminal proceedings are pending. The respondent contended that the passport was seized under the Cr.P.C., asserting that the C.B.I. acted within its rights. The Supreme Court analyzed the legal framework, emphasizing that while the police can seize a passport, only the passport authority can impound it. The court highlighted the distinction between seizure and impounding, noting that the C.B.I.'s retention amounted to impounding without following the necessary legal procedures. The court ultimately set aside the High Court's order, directing the C.B.I. to return the passport to the appellant while allowing them to seek impounding through the proper channels. The court refrained from commenting on the merits of the underlying case, focusing solely on the legality of the passport's retention.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Right to Travel - Deprivation of Right - Passports Act, 1967, Section 10 - The court held that no person can be deprived of the right to travel abroad except according to procedure established by law, emphasizing the necessity of following the provisions of the Passports Act for impounding passports (Paras 5-10). B) Criminal Procedure - Seizure vs. Impounding - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Sections 102, 104 - The court distinguished between seizure and impounding, stating that while police can seize a passport, only the passport authority can impound it, thus invalidating the C.B.I.'s retention of the appellant's passport (Paras 11-15). C) Jurisdiction - Special vs. General Law - Passports Act, 1967, Section 10; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 104 - The court ruled that the special provisions of the Passports Act prevail over the general provisions of the Cr.P.C. regarding passport impounding, reinforcing the need for adherence to specific statutory procedures (Paras 15-16).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the retention of the appellant's passport by the C.B.I. was lawful under the Passports Act, 1967 and the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order and directed the C.B.I. to return the appellant's passport within a week, allowing the C.B.I. to seek impounding through the proper authorities under the Passports Act.
Law Points
- impounding of passport
- right to travel
- Passports Act
- 1967
- Code of Criminal Procedure
- 1973
- jurisdiction of passport authority
- civil consequences of impounding
